John B gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

Aye, fair; while it's true that Inner London voted for Ken this time
round, and that Outer London reliably swings Tory, I do accept it makes
more sense for the outer boroughs to be included in the administrative
unit. It's kind-of annoying that their vote dictates what happens on
issues like bendies and pedestrianisation in the centre, which is of
peripheral interest to them at best

That presupposes, of course, that those who live in outer London always
stay there and never head inside the Circulars, or the Ring Road, or
whatever your arbitrary boundary may be...

They don't. The vast majority are just as heavily affected - perhaps even
more so, when it comes to transport decisions - than those who live more
centrally. Many of those who live centrally could easily walk or cycle to
work (or for leisure/shopping/etc) should buses & tubes not be available
or viable. Those who live further out can't.

There's also those of us who live outside the boroughs whilst still being
heavily affected by TfL and the GLA, yet get no representation.

On Oct 22, 12:52*pm, Adrian wrote:
Aye, fair; while it's true that Inner London voted for Ken this time
round, and that Outer London reliably swings Tory, I do accept it makes
more sense for the outer boroughs to be included in the administrative
unit. It's kind-of annoying that their vote dictates what happens on
issues like bendies and pedestrianisation in the centre, which is of
peripheral interest to them at best

That presupposes, of course, that those who live in outer London always
stay there and never head inside the Circulars, or the Ring Road, or
whatever your arbitrary boundary may be...

There's a legal definition of Inner London; I was going with that...

They don't. The vast majority are just as heavily affected - perhaps even
more so, when it comes to transport decisions - than those who live more
centrally. Many of those who live centrally could easily walk or cycle to
work (or for leisure/shopping/etc) should buses & tubes not be available
or viable. Those who live further out can't.

For rail and tube transport, you're right. For bus transport, I
disagree - there are very few people who live in outer London boroughs
and commute into the centre via bus; buses are a way of getting people
between parts of outer London, of getting people between parts of
inner London, and of getting poor people from inner London into the
centre (and walking from Thamesmead, Stamford Hill or Hampstead Heath
to the centre isn't really commutable).

There's definitely some logic in having local control of bus services,
with the people of Hillingdon voting to keep genteel single deckers,
whilst the people of Tower Hamlets vote for bendies to funnel them
into the centre - but realistically I think it's be too
administratively complex and having it all done by TfL is more
sensible.

There's also those of us who live outside the boroughs whilst still being
heavily affected by TfL and the GLA, yet get no representation.

....or taxation. I reckon George Washington would be happy with that.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

John B gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

That presupposes, of course, that those who live in outer London always
stay there and never head inside the Circulars, or the Ring Road, or
whatever your arbitrary boundary may be...

There's a legal definition of Inner London; I was going with that...

Three, actually...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_London

For rail and tube transport, you're right. For bus transport, I disagree
- there are very few people who live in outer London boroughs and
commute into the centre via bus; buses are a way of getting people
between parts of outer London, of getting people between parts of inner
London, and of getting poor people from inner London into the centre
(and walking from Thamesmead, Stamford Hill or Hampstead Heath to the
centre isn't really commutable).

True. But since Thamesmead isn't part of one definition, whilst the third
stretches to areas not even under GLA control at one point...

There's definitely some logic in having local control of bus services,
with the people of Hillingdon voting to keep genteel single deckers,
whilst the people of Tower Hamlets vote for bendies to funnel them into
the centre - but realistically I think it's be too administratively
complex and having it all done by TfL is more sensible.

Indeed. TfAL, not TfIL.

There's also those of us who live outside the boroughs whilst still
being heavily affected by TfL and the GLA, yet get no representation.

...or taxation.

looks at price rises in fares

On Oct 22, 1:57*pm, Adrian wrote:
There's also those of us who live outside the boroughs whilst still
being heavily affected by TfL and the GLA, yet get no representation.
...or taxation.

looks at price rises in fares

Not being subsidised as much as everyone else != being taxed.

(AIUI, Essex County Council does subsidise TfL services, hence why the
Central Line is all in zone 6 - there's presumably some kind of
representation of ECC within TfL that goes on as a quid pro quo. If
your local authority doesn't, then why not vote for a candidate who
says they will?)

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

John B wrote:

There's a legal definition of Inner London; I was going with that...

So are Newham and Haringey in Inner London (per the ONS and Census) or Outer
(per the old County and ILEA)? And the reverse for Greenwich?

On Oct 22, 1:58*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" T.C.Roll-
wrote:
There's a legal definition of Inner London; I was going with that...

So are Newham and Haringey in Inner London (per the ONS and Census) or Outer
(per the old County and ILEA)? And the reverse for Greenwich?

Greenwich in, Newham and Harringey out.

The 1963 London Government Act still determines central funding
levels, and Newham is still grumpy about being excluded:
http://apps.newham.gov.uk/aboutus/Po...nnerLondon.pdf

....so that'll be the legal definition, irrespective of what the
statisticians say.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 05:20:43AM -0700, John B wrote:
On Oct 22, 12:52=A0pm, Adrian wrote:
They don't. The vast majority are just as heavily affected - perhaps even
more so, when it comes to transport decisions - than those who live more
centrally. Many of those who live centrally could easily walk or cycle to
work (or for leisure/shopping/etc) should buses & tubes not be available
or viable. Those who live further out can't.
For rail and tube transport, you're right. For bus transport, I
disagree - there are very few people who live in outer London boroughs
and commute into the centre via bus; buses are a way of getting people
between parts of outer London, of getting people between parts of
inner London

Lots of us in outer London will travel inwards by train or tube and
then use a bus for the last bit of the journey. There's also quite
a lot of people who use the bus to get from outer to inner London - to
hubs like Brixton, from where they transfer to the Victoria line.

And I, for example, find it more convenient, once I've got to Victoria
or London Bridge on the train, to use a bus for the last bit of my journey
to work instead of using two tubes.

There's a reason why major railway stations often have a bus station
attached to them y'know!

--
David Cantrell | A machine for turning tea into grumpiness

Just because it is possible to do this sort of thing
in the English language doesn't mean it should be done